Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8) This order shall take effect from 1st April, 1981.

9) These order issues with the concurrence of the Finance Department vide their U.O. No. Group-B/2292 dated 16.10.81.

10) The Accountant General, West Bengal has been informed.

Sd./N. Ghosal Deputy Secretary.

3. Pursuant to the aforesaid scheme the Director of Technical Education by his letter dated 4th June 1992 addressed to the Principal, Raiganj Polytechnic granted approval to the recommendations of the Hostel Committee for appointment of one cook, one assistant cook, one kitchen/helper and two helpers/assistants.

4. By an office order dated 29th July 1992 the Chairman of the Hostel Committee of Raiganj Polytechnic appointed the petitioners No. l, 2, 3 and 4 provisionally for a period of six months or until further orders and specifying in clear terms that the appointment was a non-government one on the following terms and conditions:

The undersigned is pleased to appoint the following persons as Hostel/Mess employee in the Raiganj Polytechnic hostel in the post mentioned against the name with effect from the date on which they join the post on provisional basis for six months or until further order whichever is earlier.

7. By a further government order dated 5th April 2002, the aforesaid revised pay scale was directed to be fixed notionally with effect from 1st February 1999 in the place of 1st January 1996, as directed by the earlier government order dated 20th July, 2000.

8. The government order dated 5th April 2002 appears to have sparked off the present litigation. The writ petitioners approached this Court with a prayer for an order declaring that the petitioners are the non-teaching employees of the Raiganj Polytechnic; an order directing the State to pay the scale of pay and other allowances including the service benefits admissible, to the post of non-teaching employees belonging to the category of the petitioners and an order rescinding the government order dated 5th April, 2002 has also been claimed on the ground that:

26. The next question which falls for determination is whether the petitioners can be deemed to be the servants of the Raiganj Polytechnic by implication?

27. Such an inference can only be drawn provided Raiganj Polytechnic is under a statutory obligation to run the canteen/mess. No such obligation was brought to our notice. In the case of G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, Nanital v. State of U.P. , the workmen of the cafeteria were deemed to be employees of the University because the University was obliged under the regulations framed under the U.P. Agricultural University Act to run such canteens.